Britain’s anti-EU UK Independence Party won its first elected seat in parliament Thursday (9 October) by a huge margin, and came a close second in another vote, proving it poses a threat to the country’s two main parties in a national election next year.

UKIP, which wants to withdraw Britain from the EU, and enact strict curbs on immigration, was expected to do well in both votes. But the wide margin of its victory in the seaside town of Clacton, and its strong performance in an election in northern England, came as a surprise.

In Clacton, the Eurosceptic party won 60% of the vote, up from zero in 2010 when it didn’t contest the area. In Heywood and Middleton, in northern England, a traditional stronghold for the opposition Labour party, it got almost 39% of the vote, up from less than 3% in 2010.

“There is nothing that we cannot achieve,” Douglas Carswell, Clacton’s new UKIP member of parliament, told supporters.

Quoting Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address and the words of John Wycliffe, a 14th Century dissident translator of the bible into English, Carswell said he backed “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

“The governing can no longer presume to know what is right for the governed,” he said immediately after he was declared the winner. “Crony corporatism is not the free market. Cosy cartel politics is not meaningful democracy. Change is coming.”

There is little prospect of UKIP winning more than a dozen of 650 seats in a national election in May next year. But its growing success threatens to split the centre-right vote and chip away at the traditional left-wing vote too making it harder for any one party to win an outright majority.

That increases the likelihood of a hung parliament, another coalition government, and potential political instability in the world’s sixth largest economy.

UKIP’s success is also likely to increase pressure on Prime Minister David Cameron to become more Eurosceptic, three years before a referendum on European Union membership which he has promised to hold if re-elected.

Douglas Carswell, a Eurosceptic, defected from Cameron’s Conservatives in August, triggering Thursday’s Clacton vote. He switched allegiance because he said he doubted the prime minister’s determination to reform the EU.

Cameron has promised to try to renegotiate Britain’s EU relationship before offering voters an in/out membership referendum in 2017. But some of his own lawmakers are sceptical about his resolve to push for real change, viewing his promise as a tactical move to try to hold his divided party together.

With a population of 53,000, Clacton, once a thriving seaside resort, began to decline as Britons turned to cheap foreign package holidays in the 1980s. It now earns its keep from retirees and day trippers from London.

Retirement homes line the seafront, gaudy arcades filled with slot machines and bookmakers dominate the town centre, and caravan parks luring low-income families with cheap deals sit on the outskirts along with Jaywick, an area officially rated as one of the most deprived in the country.

UKIP-friendly constituency

Reading newspapers in his souvenir shop at the end of Clacton’s 19th-century pier, David Ashton, 66, said yesterday he had voted UKIP because he had lost faith in Cameron.

“Ever since I was old enough to vote I have always voted Conservative,” he told Reuters. “But this time I voted UKIP. This place needs a shake-up. The Conservatives have promised stuff before and not delivered. I don’t trust them anymore.”

He cited their failure to curb immigration and what he said was their desire to remain in the EU, something he opposed.

In terms of its demographics, Clacton is the most UKIP-friendly constituency in the country, according to pre-election analysis by academics Matthew Goodwin and Robert Ford.

“It’s very white, very old, very working class, lots of economic deprivation and … there is a heightened anxiety over migration and Europe,” Goodwin said.

UKIP also polled unexpectedly strongly in another special election held on Thursday in northern England after the death of the area’s Labour member of parliament.

UKIP said that result showed it was a threat to the established left as well as the right.

Tapping into a weariness with mainstream politics, UKIP won the European elections in Britain in May and poached two of Cameron’s lawmakers in the last six weeks.

Cameron’s strategy to stem UKIP’s rise has been to warn voters that “a vote for UKIP is a vote for Labour”.

Cameron, who once derided UKIP as a bunch of “fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists”, has also said his is the only party able to deliver a referendum on EU membership.

His party shrugged off its defeat in Clacton, putting it down to Carswell’s defection. The ballot was not representative of how people would vote in a national election when much more was at stake, Conservative lawmakers said.

However, UKIP believes its success will begin to unravel a political establishment under which until recently Britain’s two main parties, the right-leaning Conservatives and left-leaning Labour, have taken turns to govern.

Though a setback to Cameron, Conservative strategists said a defeat in Clacton would be manageable. They are more concerned about the possibility of defeat in another special election.

Triggered by another defection to UKIP, the election, expected in November will be in Rochester, a part of southern England where voters are seen as less UKIP-friendly. The UKIP candidate there, Mark Reckless, a former Conservative, is regarded as far more vulnerable than Carswell.

Background

The UK European elections were held the 22 May, coinciding with local elections in England and Northern Ireland.

A total of 73 MEPs were elected. The Conservatives, the party currently in governing coalition with the Liberal Democrats, were pushed into third place for the first time in a European Parliament election, the same position as Labour in the previous 2009 European Parliament election. It was also the first time since 1984 that the largest opposition party failed to win the European Parliament election.

The UK Independence Party UKIP won 32.88% of the vote and 24 MEP seats. The Labour Party came second with 27.4% of the vote and 20 MEP seats. The Tories came third with 26.03% of the vote and 19 MEP seats. The Green Party of England and Wales obtained 3 MEP seats, the Scottish National Party obtained 2, The Liberal Democrats and four smaller parties obtained one seat each.

Comments

Leave a Reply

It was more a win by the popular incumbent MP rather than UKIP who had a substantial majority from the General Election based on his personality rather than his previous affiliation to the conservative party.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Iwantout

10/10/2014 12:08

Certainly the local popularity of Douglas Carswell will have been a very major factor in Clacton, but that does not explain the result in Heywood and Middleton. No one could possibly believe that UKIP are anything other than a protest vote; however they are now such a protest that as the article suggests they are fragmenting the voter base of the major parties and will cause them all to adjust their policies accordingly. Clearly the main areas of adjustment that the Parties will have to address are the two areas UKIP have made their own, the relationship with the EU… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

A Londoner

10/10/2014 17:35

I agree with much of your post but is it wise to assume that the EU (sans the UK) will have unity of purpose as regards Brexit? The more I follow this site the more I realise the difficulty the EU has in reaching agreement. The UK v the EU makes it sound easy but the reality is that the UK will have to negotiate with 27 EU members each of which will have the ability to block a Brexit Treaty.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 18:19

True. In addition, the treaties does not let the possibility for a member state to leave the EU. As a consequence the country will have to modify the treaties and to thus negotiate with the 28 (yes it is 28 now) members. Sadly UK is stuck in.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Iwantout

10/10/2014 20:10

Article 50 (1) TFEU “Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements”. No country has the power to prevent any other country leaving the EU. With regards to subsequent negotiations, Article 50(2), “the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal………..It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.” QMV (55% of countries representing 65% of the population) is therefore the mechanism that will be used… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Joe Thorpe

10/10/2014 12:16

Weird Ed explains that result, he’s utterly cringe-worthy, I know there are some labour voters that would vote for a pig if you painted it red but seriously? He’s as odd as they come, I’d hate to think he represented my at the despatch box you might as well make Len McCluskey chancellor of the exchequer and save having to fix strings to his puppets

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 14:42

I believe that EC understand what happens, but I don’t see why it should adapt itself to the new political reality in the UK. The EC should defend the interest of the EU as whole and not try to please UK. If UK really wants to control migration from the EU, it should just leave the bloc. It’s quite basic to have the free mobility of workers in an economic union. Please read what the Economist Robert Mundell says about labor mobility across the single market to understand the economic rational behind it. That’s the reason why the EC was… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Iwantout

10/10/2014 15:29

I am not claiming the EU must change for the UK, simply that because the ground is shifting and the main political parties here are now being moved against their will to adopt ever more Eurosceptic positions this must enter the EU political calculations. If the EU decides to continue along its current path, and despite the lack of any popular mandate and voting to the contrary it is clearly in a position to do so, then the consequence are either a UK that obstructs every change, seeks opt out and is extreme awkward or a UK that becomes increasing… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Joe Thorpe

10/10/2014 14:50

If the EU wants to become one country unified with one government & one currency it needs to rid itself of the UK. It will then be able to evolve into a USE with a single Government, Military, Foreign Policy, Currency etc across the board. It will happen much easier if we leave & we are more likely to do so If we get a simple free trade agreement such as the one Korea, Singapore or Canada will soon enjoy. If we don’t get that the EU will lose free access to its biggest export market where it enjoys a… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 15:18

@ Joe Thorpe: I think you are absolutly right. It would be better for both UK and the EU to split. UK will never accept to join the Eurozone. Actually the British never wanted to join the Economic union. Most people didn’t realise that forming customs union would automaticly lead to the common market. What the British wanted was just a free trade area. I still do not understand why British political leaders joined the ECC. They lied to the people. It was known from the begenning that the aim was a complete economic integration. I believe that countries would… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Iwantout

10/10/2014 15:32

It seems that you and I are really not that far apart after all.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 16:18

Yes I think we agree. People should be able to choose to be in or out. They should also be informed to understand what are the implications to be in or out. Most politicians never tell the full story. I don’t understand why UKIP keeps bashing the EU as if there intrinsically negative. Economic integration is a good project. It’s just not something that British are willing to join. Norway choose not to join EU, but they still view it as positive for the rest of Europe. The problem of UK is that it joined something that people didn’t like.… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 16:21

I do like the EU. I think it makes sense to have a strong Economic Union in Europe. But I don’t like idea that some people who don’t like the EU are forced to be in.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 15:23

However I don’t believe they will ever be united Military or Foreign Policy. I don’t believe in the USE. The EU will never be a federal state or complete political union. It is and should only be about economic integration. This involves a single currency and the same social policy. That’s far enough!

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Joe Thorpe

10/10/2014 15:35

Well thats what the Lisbon treaty was all about, everyone has signed up to EEAS & CSDP etc etc & if we dont block it or leave we will be sucked into it altogether. We are building the two carriers as part of CSDP it was assumed other EU states would build support vessels to create a EuroNavy but they dont have the money, now we will have two carriers but never be able to put two to sea as we only have the support vessels for one ship. The same with the Air to Air refuelling, we made up… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Jay

10/10/2014 18:39

Now you know how we in the US feel about this lopsided NATO thing.

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Joe Thorpe

10/10/2014 15:29

@ge041075 The EFTA comes with costs, we dont want to support the EU or its institutions, we just want a simple FTA agreement the same as Singapore, Korea or Canada. The EU was hyperventilating over the success of signing a trade agreement with Canada, imagine their delight at being able to sign a similar agreement with the 6th biggest economy in the world? I also believe we should be more like America with Oil & Gas & not export it outside of the UK, this will keep it out of the Brent rate which will cause the value of our… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

Joe Thorpe

10/10/2014 15:29

@ge041075 The EFTA comes with costs, we dont want to support the EU or its institutions, we just want a simple FTA agreement the same as Singapore, Korea or Canada. The EU was hyperventilating over the success of signing a trade agreement with Canada, imagine their delight at being able to sign a similar agreement with the 6th biggest economy in the world? I also believe we should be more like America with Oil & Gas & not export it outside of the UK, this will keep it out of the Brent rate which will cause the value of our… Read more »

0

| Hide Replies ∧

ge041075

10/10/2014 16:00

@Joe Thorpe: Any Free Trade Agreement comes with costs. In addition they all induce a loss of sovereignty. The TTIPP wuth Canada and US are good examples. It’s what they call globalisation. Now we all have to bear the consequences of political decisions on which we have no say. The idea behind the European Parliement was to try regain sovereignty. But even the EU is powerless. What we would really need is a Parliament at the international level. The only body which has a bit of power is the WTO.